<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2026 (7) TMI 1936 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=796050</link>
    <description>Extended limitation for central excise recovery requires suppression or misstatement; consistent disclosure of Nicotine Sulphate&#039;s manufacture and Chapter 29 classification in ER-1 returns does not support its invocation. Nicotine Sulphate is described as a vegetable alkaloid derivative classifiable under CTH 29399900, as the Chapter 29 exception for alkaloids applies despite the general requirement of separate chemical definition. The analysis also questions reliance on delayed third-party sample testing and classification opinions by chemical examiners. Related-party valuation requires evidence meeting the statutory test; a common individual&#039;s roles in the supplier and purchaser alone do not establish that relationship or justify cost-based valuation.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 29 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 31 Jul 2026 08:27:55 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=914546" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (7) TMI 1936 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=796050</link>
      <description>Extended limitation for central excise recovery requires suppression or misstatement; consistent disclosure of Nicotine Sulphate&#039;s manufacture and Chapter 29 classification in ER-1 returns does not support its invocation. Nicotine Sulphate is described as a vegetable alkaloid derivative classifiable under CTH 29399900, as the Chapter 29 exception for alkaloids applies despite the general requirement of separate chemical definition. The analysis also questions reliance on delayed third-party sample testing and classification opinions by chemical examiners. Related-party valuation requires evidence meeting the statutory test; a common individual&#039;s roles in the supplier and purchaser alone do not establish that relationship or justify cost-based valuation.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 29 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=796050</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>